Planning permission not refused, but will be - Anyone help?

[boon147]

Good evening all,

Won't bore you with all the preamble - but to cut a long story short, done it all by the book with an Architect who submitted on my behalf etc, and we are now at a crossroads:

The planning officer has not yet officially refused, but said it will happen - When asked why, they won't share any info or are being very vague on the reason. As such, they have given me 2 choices:

- Continue with the application with a recommendation that it'll get refused
- Withdraw, have a chat with them where they will disclose the information, and then allow resubmission (at another cost of £241 and the obvious delay)

The officer will not engage with my Architect, despite that being the 'normal' process so I'm struggling to understand what to do next. I would totally understand if the street I lived in was all original without any modifications, but just about 10 doors away, a double storey extension has just been completed that is similar to mine, however I am keeping the garage and therefore the potential parking space - Without knowing what grounds it will be refused on, it is difficult I agree, but surely have a chat with my Architect at least?

I thought the planning laws were being relaxed to boost the economy, and here I am with a 100k extension that is in line or smaller than recent extensions on the street, and the information is being held to ransom. On a side note, 90% of the refusals for this year, and in my village were done by my officer - Is it just that I am unlucky to have landed a jobsworth?

I am more frustrated that they just will not engage unless I give them more money!

I would assume someone has had something similar (although I hope not) so you may be able to help.

Cheers all,

Paul

 

[DevilDamo]

Unfortunately LPA’s do not “have to” engage with the applicant or agent during the determination process. This happens a lot when the PO feels the changes required to bring it inline with Planning policy are too vast.

I used to advise clients to opt for a withdrawal as opposed to a refusal as that would soften a property history search. But with a withdrawal, you’ll get nothing back from the LPA apart from a letter that confirms your application has been withdrawn. As you’ve paid the money, let them produce their report, which you can then deal with and address post Planning decision either with the same or a different architect.

As a kind of last resort, you or your agent could ask the PO to carry out their service as per the NPPF as being pro-active.

 

[Notch7]

I would've thought an architect worth his salt would not submit an application that had was so far from potential of consent.

Most I have dealt with, understand the planning policy framework for the area and wouldnt design something that had zero chance of consent unless they had a mad client that didnt listen.


although I know planning officers often dont engage -I did a job where I was told "it will be fine", only to have the planning officer refuse it the last day before he took a 2 week holiday.

What happens is planning officers find it less work to refuse something than engage. Ok, it may get resubmitted, but that is just a list on another day in the future...shortsighted I know!

 

[Nakajo]

I don't understand why you think you would incur additional planning fee, regardless of which route you choose. Incidentally, I sometimes have applications refused. Often, a submission to the Planning Inspectorate, and/or minor modifications to the scheme, based on the formal reasons for refusal will gain a winning scheme.

 

[^woody^]

Engage with the planner's manager

 

[boon147]

Afternoon,

Thanks for your responses.

We've managed to get a little more info out of the planner, and the changes that are at least being communicated are completely minor and could easily be rectified and not require a withdrawal and re-submission - Having said that, the planner is sticking to their guns and said its either a withdrawal or continue and refuse.

Honestly at this point, I just need to get this through the door because I've been delayed long enough, but for a bit of background / understanding, the issues are:

• Roof light in-line with existing FF but recommend 2 to make it look more symmetrical (wasn't included in the original plan due to the set back nature of the roof-line, and therefore wouldn't work as the skylight would cross between the 2 levels of roofline)
• View from the neighboring area (west) - side profile of GF extension too long (even though its below the 6m that would normally fall under extended home Prior Approval so not quite sure what that is about, and given the fact my neighbour has an 8m GF extension to the east)
• Dormer is visible from neighboring property (east) - I wasn't quite sure about this one?!? It is within the original roof space and therefore would fall under PD and none of my neighbours or the local Parish Council have raised any objections (Probably my fault though, I didn't opt for the high tech invisible dormer as my budget doesn't quite stretch)

A little bemused to be honest - Don't get me wrong, this is the first time I am doing this so I have nothing to compare it to which is why I am here, but I get the impression that these could have all been avoided had the officer picked up the phone to my Architect?

As for the cost, yes that was my error, I was under the impression that a withdrawal didn't qualify for a free-resubmission so thats my bad.

I am going to give the planner the benefit of the doubt because ultimately I have to, and if this is the route they want to take then I just have to toe the line - I was merely wondering if this is common practice. I understand the planner is new to the role and therefore could explain a few things, so we have withdrawn, the Architect is now making the modifications based on their guidance so hopefully when its re-submitted then it should be a pretty quick process.

Thanks all.

 

[^woody^]

If you submit altered drawings, my understanding is that they have to consider them and reconsult if need be under the current application.

 

[Nakajo]

Well, not if you withdraw.

 

[^woody^]

Try to avoid any premature recantation